Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42846735›Full record

ArticleGlobal & regional health technology assessment

Real-world application of an integrated MCDA-economic framework in continence care technology: a hospital-based case study.

Gianpaolo Franzoso, Novella Piazzetta, Giorgia Zorzetto, Mirsad Pasalic, Valentina Ceron, Flavia Damiano, Cristina Tridello, Marina Coppola

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global & regional health technology assessment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Gianpaolo FranzosoPharmacy unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-3804-3556
Novella PiazzettaPharmacy unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5425-8539
Giorgia ZorzettoPharmacy unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2528-691X
Mirsad PasalicMedical Oncology inpatient unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.
Valentina CeronMedical Oncology inpatient unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.
Flavia DamianoSurgical Inpatient Unit Nurse Manager, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3229-953X
Cristina TridelloSurgical Inpatient Unit Nurse Manager, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.
Marina CoppolaPharmacy unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua - Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Hospital-based Health Technology Assessment (HTA) supports transparent decisions about adopting medical technologies by balancing practical benefits against clinical, organizational, and economic consequences. This study evaluated a single-use continence care system using an integrated decision-support framework. Methods: The single-use system, based on disposable absorbent components, was compared with the standard reusable bedpan/urinal pathway, including washing and reprocessing. The assessment combined Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), Budget Impact Analysis (BIA), Cost-Consequence Analysis (CCA), a 30-day field test across inpatient units at two hospital sites, and an implementation-specific questionnaire. During the field test, 168 admissions were recorded. MCDA used a weighted aggregate score, while the economic analysis adopted the hospital perspective over three years. Deterministic sensitivity analyses examined economic inputs and MCDA domain weights. Results: The single-use system offered perceived advantages in ease of use, hygiene, and odor reduction. However, these did not offset limited supporting evidence, lower patient-comfort ratings, operational issues, and higher costs. The MCDA score decreased from 4.80 for standard care to 2.60 for the single-use system (difference: -2.20). Cost per patient increased from €0.65 to €1.00, an incremental cost of €0.35. The three-year budget impact was €2,634 and remained within the local affordability threshold. As the technology was more costly and produced lower overall MCDA value, it was classified as dominated. Sensitivity analyses did not alter the recommendation. Conclusion: The integrated MCDA-economic framework supported transparent hospital-level decision-making. Affordability and perceived practical advantages were insufficient to justify routine adoption of the single-use continence care system.

Indexed as

Budget impact analysisContinence careCost-consequence analysisHospital-based HTAMedical devicesMulti-criteria decision analysisReal-world evidence

Identifiers

PMID42846735
PMCPMC13643327

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.